Zimbabwe: Land Resettlement Grants

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement what was the undertaking of the United Kingdom Government in respect of financing the purchase of commercial farms in Zimbabwe for African settlement; how much of the undertaking was fulfilled and at what cost; if it was not completed what were the reasons; and, if so, what is the potential cost of fulfilling the remainder of the undertaking.

Baroness Amos: At the Lancaster House Constitutional Conference in 1979, the UK Government undertook to assist with land resettlement alongside other donors. No specific sum was pledged, but £44 million has been provided to date; £20 million was offered through the 1981 Land Resettlement Grant, which was closed in 1996 with £3 million unspent because Government did not offer plans to use it; £27 million was provided during the 1980s as budgetary support to help the Zimbabwe Government meet its share of resettlement costs.
	DFID has recently offered another £5 million to continue help for resettlement working through civil society and private sector initiatives as part of a total of £38 million development assistance. Further support for Government-led resettlement is dependent on a return to the rule of law, and to the principles agreed by government and donors at the 1998 Land Conference.

Overseas Aid and Development Programme Support

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proportion of Gross National Product has been spent on official overseas aid and development programmes in each of the past five years; what proportion it is now anticipated will be spent in each of the next five years; and when it is expected that the 0.7 per cent of gross national product target will be met.

Baroness Amos: Figures for official development assistance as reported to the DAC of the OECD are based on expenditure in calendar years, and as percentage of GNP for the past five calendar years were as follows:
	1995 0.29
	1996 0.27
	1997 0.26
	1998 0.27
	1999 0.23 (provisional) The provisional oda/GNP ratio in 1999 shows a drop to 0.23 per cent. This is a statistical quirk due to the calendar year reporting required by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, while the timing of DFID commitments and expenditure is mostly based on financial years. The planned expenditure for the current financial year is the highest ever.
	While all the elements that make up the figures are not under our control, we expect to record an oda/GNP ratio of 0.30 per cent in calendar year 2001, in line with the Government's commitment to reverse the decline in aid spending during this Parliament. Further, the Government has stated that it will ensure the ratio of oda to GNP will rise to 0.33 per cent by financial year 2003-04.
	No assumptions on the oda/GNP ratio have been made beyond 2003-04.

Displaced and Refugee Eritreans: Aid

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they are taking to respond to the United Nations appeal for £87 million to assist the 1.1 million Eritreans displaced by the recent war and affected by drought.

Baroness Amos: The UK has committed humanitarian assistance worth £885,000 to help meet the needs of the internally displaced in Eritrea so far this year, with a further £250,000 for Eritrean refugees in Sudan. We continue to monitor the situation and stand ready to do more. We have also contributed 17 per cent of the cost of the 65,400 metric tons of cereals provided through the EC for delivery this year.

Debt Relief

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much of anticipated official overseas aid and development expenditure in each of the next five years will be earmarked for debt relief.

Baroness Amos: The UK Government are committed to writing off 100 per cent of the debts owed to them by Heavily Indebted Poor Countries--some £1.7 billion in all--as and when countries become eligible.
	There is a high degree of uncertainty over the amount of debt relief which will be reportable to the OECD Development Assistance Committee as official development assistance over the next five years. On the assumption that the Public Service Agreement target published this week by DFID and HM Treasury is realised, and on current assumptions over which countries achieve HIPC eligibility and when they do so, the total benefit from the UK to debtor countries at the moment when debt relief is irrevocable--i.e. at completion point--will be approximately £140 million in 2001-02, £175 million 2002-03 and £300 million in 2003-04. No assumption has yet been made for the following two years.
	The amount of DFID's development expenditure on debt relief for 2001-04 was given in reply to Lord Hylton (Official Report 27 July, col. WA 69).

Kosovo: Aid Pledges

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What sums were promised in international aid for Kosovo and over what period; and what amount has so far been paid.

Baroness Amos: The total of pledges at the two donor conferences on Kosovo so far held is £2.1 billion. As at 31 Decemer 1999, £1.5 billion of this had been committed and £879 million disbursed.
	The total bilateral commitment by the United Kingdom is £119 million, of which £113 million has been disbursed. In addition, our share of the European Community's programmes for Kosovo in 1999 and 2000 is about £90 million.

Peers' Expenses

Lord Marlesford: asked the Leader of the House:
	Which of the existing travelling and other expense allowances for Peers can be varied by the House of Lords itself; and which have to be referred to the Senior Salaries Review Body

Baroness Jay of Paddington: Such matters are not normally decided by the House itself but referred to the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB). There is no statutory requirement for parliamentary pay and allowances to be referred to the SSRB. The SSRB is an independent body set up by the Government to advise on, inter alia, Peers' allowances. The SSRB takes evidence as appropriate and makes recommendations based on this. The Government then decide whether to accept the recommendations and place a resolution before the House accordingly.

Joint Committee on Human Rights

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Jay of Paddington on 11 July (WA 26), whether the consultations on the proposed Joint Committee on Human Rights are likely to be concluded in sufficient time to enable the Joint Committee to be set up before the coming into force of the Human Rights Act 1998 on 2 October 2000; and, if not, why not.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Government have made every effort to take forward negotiations on the Joint Committee on Human Rights through the usual channels in both Houses with a view to establishing the Committee before the summer. Discussions are still taking place and unfortunately it is now, therefore, very unlikely that consultations on the Joint Committee will be concluded before the summer adjournment.

Joint Committee on Human Rights

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they first announced their support for the creation of a Joint Committee on Human Rights; and what has been the progress of this proposal since it was first announced.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: We explained our views on a Joint Committee on Human Rights in the Human Rights Bill White Paper. Draft terms of references were drawn up earlier this year, and consultations through the usual channels began in the spring, as indicated in my answer of 25 May. This House has now agreed to the proposed terms of reference; we await the concurrence of the other place.

Prisons: Target Performance Improvement

Baroness Wilkins: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What recommendations were made by Lord Laming's working group on Target Performance Improvement.[HL
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary announced the establishment of Lord Laming's working group on 31 January 2000 (Official Report, Commons, col. 425W). My noble friend Lord Laming has completed his report, and copies have been placed in the Library and printed paper office.
	I am very grateful to the noble friend Lord Laming and his colleagues on the working group, for their analysis and recommendations. Many of these recommendations build on the extensive change of the prison service programme being managed by the Director General. We accept all the recommendations made in the report, save where my noble friend Lord Laming or the Director General has advised us that further work is required in order to assess how best to take the recommendation forward.
	We have, therefore, today, announced that the right honourable Member for Fareham, and Chairman of the Newbridge Trust, Sir Peter Lloyd, has agreed to chair a review of the role of prisons' boards of visitors (Recommendation 16). Mr Patrick Carter, a non-executive Director of the Prison and Probation Services, has agreed to lead a review of the Prison Service's programme of Private Finance Initiative (PFI) prisons and market-testing (Recommendation 8).
	The Director General has been asked to report back to my right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Home Office, Mr Boateng, at the latest by October 2000, with a more detailed action plan in response to Recommendations 4, 5, 9, 13 and 14. I have also asked the Director General and Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons to take forward Recommendation 12.
	We welcome the report's focus on updating personnel policies, and the importance placed on succession planning, and the effective management of sickness absence and poor performers. These underscore the importance of major programmes of work already under way within the Prison Service. My noble friend Lord Laming has noted the leadership being given by the Director General and the Deputy Director General, and the report's recommendations regarding managerial accountability and the pivotal role of the area manager in improving performance built on recent reforms relating to regionalisation.
	The Prison Service is in the process of modernising its information technology systems, and will be introducing service level agreements into all public sector prisons by April 2001. Work is also in hand to develop a more sophisticated means of linking performance with the allocation of resources. The Quinquennial Review of the Prison Service, conducted in 1999, reaffirmed its status as an Executive Agency.
	My noble friend Lord Laming's recommendations are:
	1. The Prison Service must give the highest priority to developing succession management in order to avoid frequent changes of governors. They must ensure that governor posts are filled as quickly and appropriately as possible.
	2. The personnel policies and practices of the Prison Service should be brought up to date. Sickness absence should be robustly challenged. Mechanisms to deal with poor performance should be improved.
	3. Staff training should be improved and be linked to quality standards and performance targets.
	4. A critical examination of information routinely circulated and gathered should be undertaken. In future, information should not be gathered or sent unless its use has been defined and justified.
	5. It is recommended that all instructions to governors, and requests for information, should be directed through the management line and should be prioritised.
	6. The Prison Service should be clearly defined as an executive Agency and be required to perform as such.
	7. The allocation of increased resources should be linked to defined objectives and outcome measures-systems must be in place so that every prison governor can demonstrate that resources are being used flexibly and to good purpose.
	8. The programme of PFI prisons and market testing should be reviewed to advise Ministers on how best to use the financial and management resources of the private sector to provide both greater choice and additional capacity to the Prison Service.
	9. We believe that service level agreements should be developed for every establishment in the public sector. In each of these establishments, a contract compliance officer should be appointed to monitor day-by-day application. In many prisons, the extra cost would be covered by the better use of resources.
	10. The Prison Service should operate to agreed national standards which are put into practice in each establishment. It is not a "federal" service and these core standards should be the basis for all evaluation of performance.
	11. The highest priority should be given to modernising the management information systems of the Prison Service and ensuring the successful implementation of the new contract with Electronic Data Systems.
	12. The Prison Service and the Chief Inspector should work to produce an agreed set of standards, to be approved by Ministers, against which the performance of prisons will be evaluated. The methodology for the inspection of prisons will be developed in relation to these standards. It should facilitate both objective assessment and comparison covering both value for money and quality of service delivered.
	13. The principle of managerial accountability must permeate the service and inform all practice and decision making.
	14. The principle of managerial responsibilities of area managers should be clearly defined and they should be held personally accountable for the performance of each prison in their area. Specialist staff should be relocated from headquarters to the areas to enable area managers to fulfil their new and demanding duties.
	15. Links between prisons and community based agencies should be strengthened and coordinated more effectively. Prison and community based agency staff should be provided with training to enable them to work together more effectively. Community based agency staff should be able to convey any concerns they have about the prison to the governor or area manager.
	16. There should be a review of the role, resources and responsibilities of boards of visitors.

Community Development Foundation

Baroness Wilkins: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the next quinquennial review of the Community Development Foundation will take place.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The next review will start in the autumn and is due to be completed by April 2001. It will be conducted under the terms of guidance for reviewing Non-Departmental Public Bodies (NDPB) included in the Government's Modernising Government White Paper. The review, which will be carried out by external consultants, is in two stages, in which the organisational options are considered first. Then, if NDPB status is confirmed, a forward-looking examination will be undertaken as to how to help develop and improve performance. An announcement of the results of stage one will also be made to Parliament. The senior official responsible for the review will be the head of the Government's Active Community Unit, based in the Home Office.

Road Traffic Offence Penalties

Baroness Wilkins: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to publish the results of the review of penalties for road traffic offences.[HL
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Government aim to publish a consultation paper on proposals arising from the review of penalties for road traffic offences during the summer Recess.

Prison Boards of Visitors

Baroness Turner of Camden: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What measures they propose to take to help prisons' boards of visitors to be more effective in the way they monitor Prison Service establishments and report on their findings.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Government value very highly the important role boards of visitors undertake as the watchdog of the Secretary of State and the independent and impartial advice they are able to provide on the standards of fairness and humanity with which those placed in custody by the courts are treated. The majority of boards work very effectively and provide a good service to Ministers and the public. However, in the light of changes within the Prison Service since the last major review of the role of the boards of visitors five years ago, we have decided that the time is right for a further review of the boards' role and we are pleased to announce that Sir Peter Lloyd has agreed to chair a Working Group to take the review forward. Sir Peter is currenty the Chairman of New Bridge, a charity which recruits and trains volunteers to visit prisoners and provides an employment service for ex-offenders.
	A board of visitors is a body created by statute, and there is one attached to every Prison Service establishment in England and Wales. Board members are lay people appointed by the Secretary of State, who are empowered under the Prison Act 1952:
	"at any time [to] enter the prison and. . .have free access to every part of it and to every prisoner and hear any complaints which may be made by the prisoners and report to the Secretary of State any matter which they consider it expedient to report."
	The Prison Rules, made under the Prison Act, set out general and specific duties. We are looking currently at ways in which to improve performance management in the Prison Service and how to ensure a greater involvement of the voluntary sector in prison issues. Against this background, it is right that we should look again at the context in which boards operate and see what can be done to improve the overall effectiveness of the system.
	I have agreed with Sir Peter the following terms of reference for the Working Group.
	"The Working Group has been established to review the legal context in which BOV operate and the effectiveness of the existing structure, and to develop proposals for enhancing the performance of the system.
	The review will take account of the relevant recommendation made in the final report of Lord Laming's Targeted Performance Initiative Working Group. The main work of the review will be to consider in depth issues relating to:--
	the composition of and appointments to boards, including whether there should be any limitation on the overall period of service by members;
	the duties, commitment and levels of performance expected of boards, the way in which they function and whether existing powers enable them to undertake their work effectively and raise with Ministers issues they need to be aware of;
	the level of funding required to enable boards to operate effectively;
	the amount and quality of training provision for boards, and whether it is sufficiently well focused;
	the most appropriate agency through which boards should be accountable and report to Ministers; and
	the way in which boards' views should be represented to Ministers and the nature and amount of support they require at national level."
	The membership of the Working Group will include the following:--
	
		
			   
			 Helen Edwards National Association for the   Care and Resettlement of   Offenders 
			 Barbara Stowe Office of the Prisons'   Ombudsman 
			 Professor Michael  Marland Former Head Teacher, North   Westminster Community School 
			 Dr Rennie Porteous Chairman, National Advisory   Council 
			 Tom Weisselberg Member, Wormwood Scrubs   Board of Visitors 
			 Steve Wagstaffe Governor, HM Prison Hull 
		
	
	The full membership has still to be finalised.

Police Information Technology Organisation: Annual Report

Lord Stone of Blackheath: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will lay before Parliament the Annual Report of the Police Information Technology Organisation.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: In accordance with the requirement of the Police Act 1997, I have received, from the Police Information Technology Organisation, a report on the discharge of its functions during the year 1999-2000. I am arranging for copies to be laid before Parliament and placed in the Library.

Prison and Probation Services: Inspection Arrangement

Baroness Turner of Camden: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have for the future inspection arrangements for the Prison and Probation Services.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary wants to open the debate on what the future inspection arrangements should be. He intends to publish a consultation paper setting out a choice of options for drawing the work of the two inspectorates closer together. He would expect to reach a decision before the end of the year, taking full account of the consultation exercise.

Prison Staff: Pay Review Body

Lord Dormand of Easington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made in setting up a pay review body for prison governors, prison officers and related grades for the Prison Service in England and Wales, and in modernising the arrangements for industrial relations; and if the pay review body and modernised arrangements will extend to the same grades in the Northern Ireland Prison Service.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Agreement has been reached to set up a Pay Review Body to make independent recommendations to the Government on the pay of prison governors, prison officers and related grades for the Prison Service in England and Wales. This review body would operate on the lines of the five existing review bodies, which deal with 1.3 million public sector employees. Like the existing review bodies, it would have a secretariat from the independent Office of Manpower Economics.
	This establishment of an independent pay determination mechanism would be under the provisions of Section 128 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 as part of a comprehensive programme of improvement in prison service management.
	It is also my right honourable friend the Home Secretary's intention, when parliamentary time allows, to replace Section 127 with a reserve statutory power and a voluntary industrial relations agreement. Section 127, as it stands, makes it unlawful for officers of a prison to take industrial action. The voluntary agreement, which has been accepted by the Prison Governors' Association (PGA), the Prison Officers' Association (POA) and the National Executive Committee (NEC), will be put to a special POA delegates conference in August. This will mean that they have agreed not to induce, support or authorise industrial action. In recognition of this, we will provide them with a new disputes procedure which will include independent arbitration. The voluntary agreement, which will be legally binding, will give my right honourable friend the Home Secretary the power to seek injunctive relief.
	My right honourable friend the Home Secretary intends to use the provisions of the voluntary agreement instead of those in Section 127, while awaiting parliamentary time to effect the changes in legislation. However, it is clear on all sides that Section 127 would be used in the event of a breakdown of the agreement.
	Together, we hope these measures will create a new climate for industrial relations in the Service. They clear the way for more constructive dialogue on a wide range of issues by modernising the way that this key group of public sector workers deal with their employer.
	The remit of the Pay Review Body would also have the scope to make an independent determination in relation to the pay of prison governors, prison officers, night patrol officers and prison auxiliaries in the Northern Ireland Prison Service based on submissions made to it by that Service.
	The implementaton of this agreement and the delivery of the intentions we have outlined above are dependent on our being satisfied that the state of industrial relations within prisons is such as to enable the effective and efficient management of the Service.
	Such a state cannot be said to have been attained in the light of the current withdrawal of goodwill by the POA, but I will keep the situation under constant review.

Criminal Records Bureau

Lord Weatherill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What demand forecasts the Criminal Records Bureau has made for criminal record checks by the voluntary sector.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: No firm figures are available for voluntary sector demand. The voluntary sector has been included in the overall demand forecasts. The Criminal Records Bureau is conscious of the need to get an accurate picture of demand and proposes working closely with registered bodies to assess the likely demand from the voluntary sector and what types of certificate are going to be required.

Criminal Records Bureau

Lord Weatherill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What estimates of the number of criminal record checks have been made by the Criminal Records Bureau for its first three years of operations; and whether they can provide a breakdown by employment sector.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Criminal Records Bureau has recently produced demand figures for its first three years of operations. Analysis has indicated levels of demand in the region of 2.5 million for the first year, 4.6 million for the second and 5.5 million for the third. The increase for years two and three reflect the introduction of the Criminal Conviction Certificate. A breakdown by employment sector is not currently available.

Criminal Records Bureau

Lord Weatherill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish the demand forecasts that the Criminal Records Bureau had made for the number of criminal record checks for the first five years of its operations from June 2001 in the following categories:
	(a) Enhanced Criminal Record Check;
	(b) The Criminal Record Certificate; and
	(c) The Criminal Convictions Certificate.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Demand forecast work is ongoing. Figures will be included as part of the Criminal Records Bureau Corporate and Business Plan. This next plan covering the period from 2001-2006 will be published in April 2001.

Dangerous Dogs

Lord Baker of Dorking: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any discussions took place between the French and British Governments over the recently announced proposals in France to deal with dangerous dogs.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: No recent discussions have taken place between the French and British Governments on the subject of dangerous dogs.

Retail Price Index

Lord Jacobs: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 28 June (WA 88), what approximately would have been the retail price index excluding mortgage interest payments (RPIX) in May 2000 if the depreciation component of the retail price index for owner-occupied houses had not been introduced in 1995, but had been introduced in (a) 1985 and (b) 1950.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter to Lord Jacobs from the National Statistician and Registrar General for England and Wales, Office for National Statistics, Mr Len Cook, dated 28 July 2000
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 28 June (WA 88), as National Statistician I have been asked to respond to your recent Question asking what approximately would have been the retail price index excluding mortgage interest payments (RPIX) in May 2000 if the depreciation component of the retail price index had not been introduced in 1995, but had been introduced in 1985 and 1950 (HL3294).
	The table attached shows index levels for RPIX and the DETR house price index (the change in the depreciation component of the RPI is measured using the DETR house price index) back to 1975 which was the first year RPIX was published. The table shows the house price index to have more variability over short periods than the RPIX. This means it is difficult to draw long term inferences about the effect of housing depreciation on RPIX based on the effect of its inclusion in the index since 1995. A historical RPIX series cannot be recalculated with the addition of depreciation as the index would have to be re-weighted for all years and this could only be undertaken at disproportionate cost.
	
		Table showing RPIX and the DETR housing index (1990=100)
		
			 Year RPIX Housing 
			 1975 28.6 16.4 
			 1976 33.3 17.9 
			 1977 38.6 19.2 
			 1978 42.0 22.3 
			 1979 47.2 28.8 
			 1980 55.2 34.9 
			 1981 61.9 36.8 
			 1982 67.2 37.7 
			 1983 70.7 42.2 
			 1984 73.8 46.1 
			 1985 77.7 50.3 
			 1986 80.5 57.2 
			 1987 83.5 66.7 
			 1988 87.3 83.8 
			 1989 92.5 101.3 
			 1990 100.0 100.0 
			 1991 106.7 98.6 
			 1992 111.7 94.9 
			 1993 115.1 92.5 
			 1994 117.8 94.8 
			 1995 121.1 95.5 
			 1996 124.7 98.9 
			 1997 128.2 108.1 
			 1998 131.5 120.0 
			 1999 134.6 133.8

Tobacco Smuggling

Lord Mason of Barnsley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the report by Martin Taylor commissioned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on tobacco smuggling cannot be published.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Martin Taylor's advice to the Chancellor was personal and confidential. It would therefore not be appropriate to disclose his advice.
	However, his recommendations on how to tackle tobacco smuggling were summarised in the Government paper Tackling Tobacco Smuggling dated March 2000. A copy of this paper has been placed in the Library.

Tobacco-related Tax Revenue

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 25 July, why they refuse to state in the Official Report the amount of money raised in the last financial year from tobacco-related taxes while at the same time they are prepared to give estimates in money terms of the amount lost to the National Health Service through smoking-related diseases (11 July, WA 22).

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: I explained in my Written Answer of 11 July (col. WA 21) that excise duty receipts on tobacco products for the year 1999-2000 were to be found in Table 2.1D of Financial Statistics.

Britain in Europe and European Movement

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any government department, directly or indirectly, has contributed to the funding of Britain in Europe; and, if so, by how much; and
	Whether any government department, directly or indirectly, has contributed to the funding of the European Movement; and, if so, by how much.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: None.

Sterling Exchange Rates

Lord Monson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 20 July (WA 106) on sterling exchange rates, whether, 18 months after the euro was first traded on 4 January 1999, the pound sterling had:
	(a) strengthened against the Swiss franc and the euro, together with currencies formally or informally linked to the euro;
	(b) weakened against the United States dollar, Canadian dollar, Mexican new peso, Japanese yen, South Korean won, Taiwan dollar, Saudi riyal and Israeli shekel;
	(c) moved by less than 6 per cent either way against the Norwegian krone, Australian dollar, New Zealand dollar, Singapore dollar and South African rand;
	(d) remained virtually unchanged against the Swedish krona; and
	(e) weakened slightly against the Indian rupee and the Thai baht;
	and whether, from a global perspective, sterling is excessively strong.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested can be derived from sterling exchange rates on the 4 of January 1999 and the 4 of July 2000. These were published on page 33 of the 5 January 1999 and 5 July 2000 editions of the Financial Times respectively.

Judicial Negligence

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the light of the recent judgment of the House that solicitors and barristers no longer have immunity from negligence claims when acting as advocates, they will bring forward legislation making similar claims possible in respect of negligent judges.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: No.

Commonhold and Leasehold Reform: Draft Bill

Baroness Massey of Darwen: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When a draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill, is to be published for consultation.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: The draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill and consultation paper will be published as a command paper during the Summer Recess. Before the publication of the printed version of the command paper, a typescript copy will be laid before Parliament. Copies of the typescript version of the draft command paper will be made available in the Vote Office and in the Printed Paper Office immediately after it has been laid before both Houses.
	A summary of the proposals which are to be included in the draft Bill is set out below.
	Draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill Part 1: Commonhold The nature and creation of a commonhold development
	In England and Wales, there are two ways to own land, freehold and leasehold. Each has its advantages and disadvantages in particular circumstances. Freehold comes closest to absolute ownership. Leasehold confers ownership for a temporary period, subject to terms and conditions contained in the contract, or lease.
	A covenant is a promise contained in a deed, such as a deed passing ownership of property from one person to another. There are two types of covenant: the positive covenant, which is a promise to do something, such as to pay rent or to keep the property in repair, and the restrictive covenant, which is a promise not to do something, such as cause a nuisance to neighbours. For historical reasons, positive covenants cannot apply to freehold land once the first buyer of the property has sold it on. However, both positive and restrictive covenants apply to leasehold property.
	This means that, where it is desired to set up a scheme to allow for ownership of interdependent properties and for the management of the common parts and facilities, the scheme must, today, be based on leasehold ownership. There is no satisfactory scheme at present which would allow for freehold ownership in such circumstances.
	As long term residential leasehold has become more and more widely discredited, pressure has grown for the Government to bring forward a scheme which would combine the security of freehold ownership with the management potential of positive covenants which could be made to apply to each owner of an interdependent property. That scheme is commonhold.
	Each separate property in the commonhold development will be called a unit. It might be a flat, or a house, a shop or a light industrial unit. The owner will be called a unit-holder. The body which will own and manage the common parts and facilities of the development will be called the commonhold association. The commonhold association will be a private company limited by guarantee, whose membership will be restricted to all the unit-holders within the development. The commonhold association will be registered at Companies House in the usual way and will have a standard set of memorandum and articles (M&A) which will be prescribed by the Lord Chancellor from time to time. This means that all the unit-holders in a development will have two interests in the property of the commonhold; a direct interest in the unit or units that they own and an interest in the commonhold association which owns the common parts.
	The commonhold association with its common parts and the associated units will be registered at HM Land Registry. In order to register, the developer of the commonhold development or the sponsor of a converting development will be required to present to HM Land Registry the M&A, and the Commonhold Community Statement (CCS), which will contain the rules and regulations of the particular commonhold. There will need to be a degree of flexibility to allow for unique features of a particular development. It might be necessary to provide for the upkeep of a bluebell wood as a site of special scientific interest, or perhaps make special arrangements for a sheltered housing component in a development. Allowance for this is to be made in the CCS where in addition to the prescribed requirements, those relating to the individual attributes of the commonhold development can be set out. These discretionary elements will be registered and form part of the documentation maintained by HM Land Registry.
	If it is necessary to obtain the consent of anyone with an interest in the land, those consents must be supplied at this stage and finally, a certificate will be required to confirm that the M&As and the CCS comply with the relevant regulations. Once the required documents are produced to HM Land Registry, the commonhold will be registered.
	It will be possible for a unit to consist of two separate areas of land, for instance a flat with a garage in a detached block, or perhaps a shop with a separate storage unit. Units may be divided from each other vertically, as are terraced houses, horizontally, as are flats in a block, or may be free standing, as are detached houses or, often, light industrial units. However, where the divisions are horizontal, no part of the commonhold may be over or under any part of a building which is not part of the same or an associated commonhold development. Conversion
	It will be possible to convert from some other status to commonhold but only if certain criteria are met. Details will be contained in regulations, but it will be necessary to obtain the consent to conversion of 100 per cent of the existing leaseholders and/or other owners of what would become units in the commonhold. Consent will also be required from the freeholder, whether that is a company wholly owned by the leaseholders, or some third party. If a third party is involved, it will not be possible to convert without having satisfied HM Land Registry that the freeholder's consent has been freely given or his interest brought out according to the scheme developed by Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) in their part of the Bill.
	It is not intended that any scheme of conversion to commonhold should give rights to commercial leaseholders or rack rented commercial occupiers which would go beyond the scheme developed by the DETR for collective leasehold enfranchisement. DETR's scheme relating to qualifying buildings and tenants and rules relating to payments to existing landlords, where applicable, will be adopted so far as is possible, with the exception that to convert to commonhold will require 100 per cent consents. Thus rules will be substantially the same for both types of conversion. Details will be contained in regulations.
	At the time of conversion all leasehold interests will cease to apply as will all terms of all leases and the units will be governed by the M&As and the CCS of the commonhold association. Management of a commonhold development
	It will be possible to add to and to diminish the size of the development by the purchase or sale of common parts provided that the specified majority of the members of the commonhold association is achieved at an appropriate meeting. There will be rules to govern the distribution of capital receipts arising from such a sale.
	The voting rights of unit-holders in the commonhold association, the size of the various types of majority required for particular purposes, the minimum requirements for the maintenance of accounts and the machinery for the setting and for the payment of the commonhold assessment, which will be substantially similar to service charges, will all be set out in the standard M&As or the CCS.
	The M&As or the CCS will set out the procedure for dealing with disputes arising within a commonhold. These are to be dealt with initially by use of internal procedures. Should these fail to settle matters, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) will be provided for. However, it is not intended to refuse access to the courts and tribunals as necessary, to ensure ECHR Article 6 compliance. The Bill will make provision for the making of regulations which will provide for this.
	The Bill will make provision for the CCS to set out the rules governing rights of entry of the commonhold association for inspection and its right to carry out works and to recover costs of such work for cases of emergency or to facilitate its obligations to maintain and repair. Winding up of a commonhold association
	The rules governing the winding up of a commonhold association will be contained in regulations. The regulations will require that the CCS sets out the rules governing the distribution of any profit arising on a voluntary winding up and other matters relating to the process.
	The winding up of an insolvent commonhold association will be carried out, so far as possible, under the standard insolvency rules. Any deviation from those rules will be laid down in regulations. Part II Leasehold Reform
	It is recognised that many existing leaseholders would not be able to convert to commonhold, or may not wish to do so. A range of measures is therefore proposed to help existing leaseholders. These reforms are intended to redress the uneven balance between landlords and leaseholders and give leaseholders a greater degree of control over the management of their homes which reflects the substantial investment they have made. They are also intended to prevent unreasonable or oppressive behaviour by unscrupulous landlords, and would provide flexibility to tackle any new forms of abuse that may arise in the future. Right to manage
	A key feature of the proposals is a new right for leaseholders of flats to take over the management of their building without having to prove shortcoming on the part of the landlord and without having to pay compensation. This reflects the fact that the leaseholders normally have by far the greatest financial interest in the building. This new right is not intended to replace the existing right of collective enfranchisement. It would provide an alternative option for leaseholders who are dissatisfied with the management of the building. Some leaseholders may wish to have the opportunity to try managing the building themselves before committing themselves to buying the freehold. The proposals would enable them to do this and would assist subsequent enfranchisement if the leaseholders wish to do so. Collective enfranchisement
	A number of changes are proposed to the collective enfranchisement provisions in the Leasehold Reform, Housing the Urban Development Act 1993. These are intended to meet the Government's commitment to make it easier for leaseholders of flats to buy their freeholds. The proposals would relax qualifying rules which have proved to be an unnecessary barrier to leaseholders seeking to buy their freehold. Changes would include the abolition of the residence test and the removal of the requirements that at least two thirds of the eligible leaseholders must participate in the process. The proposals would also reduce the scope for costly arguments over the price payable, including a requirement to seek permission to appeal against decisions of leasehold valuation tribunals.
	Comparable changes are proposed to leaseholders' rights to acquire a new lease of their flat under the 1993 Act, and to buy the freehold of their house under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967. The existing residence test would be replaced by a requirement to have held the lease for at least two years. There would be special provisions to help personal representatives of deceased leaseholders. Service charges
	Major changes are proposed to leaseholders' rights in relation to service charges. Our intention is that leaseholders should have the right to challenge any charges payable under a lease. These would include the cost of improvements, which are a major concern to many local authority leaseholders, and charges for approvals or consents. The requirements for landlords to consult leaseholders would be strengthened and simplified. The threshold for consultation about major works would be related to the amount payable by an individual leaseholder, rather than the cost of the works as a whole. There would be a new requirement to consult before entering into contracts for the provision of ongoing works or services lasting 12 months or more. Disputes over compliance would be transferred to the leasehold valuation tribunals.

Remploy: Annual Performance Agreement

Baroness Gale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What targets Remploy has been set in its 2000-01 Annual Performance Agreement.

Baroness Blackstone: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment and Equal Opportunities has written to the Chairman of Remploy approving the 2000-01 Annual Performance Agreement between the Department and the Company. This agreement covers the year from 1 April 2000. It has been negotiated by the Chief Executive of the Employment Service on behalf of my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment. The targets are:
	The average number of disabled people employed by Remploy Ltd will be 10,400;
	The average number of disabled people employed under the interwork scheme will be 4,400;
	The average number of progressions will increase to 700;
	Remploy Ltd will maintain a total unit cost target (operating deficit per disabled worker) of £9,600.
	The text of the Annual Performance Agreement has been placed in the Library.

Traveller Children: Education

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the level of expenditure from central Government funds for the education of traveller children; and how the funds are allocated and spent.

Baroness Blackstone: Funding to meet the additional costs for the education of traveller children is provided through the Ethnic Minority and Traveller Achievement Grant, part of the Department's Standards Fund, the main financial resource for the delivery of national education priorities.
	In the current financial year 2000-2001, the expenditure specifically related to the education of traveller children is £15.7 million. In 1999-2000 it was £13.7 million. Allocations were made on applications received from local education authorities. Ninety-three local education authorities receive funding to support 17,000 traveller children in 3,400 schools.
	The grant supports the provision of peripatetic teachers; specialist education welfare officers; pupil transport costs and uniform grants and support for distance learning.

Corporal Punishment in Independent Schools

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the use of corporal punishment in independent schools is banned under the School Standards and Framework Act 1998.

Baroness Blackstone: From September 1999, Section 131 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 outlawed corporal punishment for all pupils in maintained and independent schools, and for children receiving nursery education.
	In no circumstances, under English law, is it therefore legal for independent schools to use corporal punishment, even where parents have given their consent.

Royal Ulster Constabulary: Widows' Pensions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What would be the total cost of bringing the pensions and compensations paid to the families of those Royal Ulster Constabulary members murdered before the increase in pension and compensation in 1982 up to the same level as the pensions and compensation paid to those whose husbands were murdered after the change of calculation, taking account of inflation; and how many families are involved.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Examination of such records as are readily available indicates that there may be in the region of 150 widows who were widowed prior to the changes being made with effect from 1982.
	The Government are sympathetic to the situation of such widows if they are now experiencing financial difficulties. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has appointed John Steele, a recently retired senior civil servant in the Northern Ireland Office, to conduct a review of the purpose and scope of the new Police Fund recommended in the Report of the Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland. The Patten Commission specifically recommended that the fund should provide financial assistance for police widows and could supplement the income of those on very low pensions. The review being conducted by John Steele will address this issue.

Royal Ulster Constabulary: Widows' Pensions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the average pensions currently being paid to Royal Ulster Constabulary widows of officers killed before November 1982; and what is the average pension of the widows of those killed after that date.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The average of pensions currently being paid to widows, widowed before and after 1982, is calculated at £532.87 and £854.72 per month respectively.

Royal Ulster Constabulary: Widows' Pensions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have received against Royal Ulster Constabulary widows of officers killed before November 1982 receiving enhanced pensions at the level of those widowed after that date.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: There have been no representations received against widows of RUC officers killed before November 1982 receiving enhanced pensions at the level of those widowed after that date.

Royal Ulster Constabulary: Widows' Pensions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why those widows of Royal Ulster Constabulary officers killed before November 1982 will not have their pensions upgraded to the enhanced level of those widowed after that date.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The pensions of widows of RUC officers murdered before and after November 1982 are paid in accordance with the Regulations in force at the time of the deaths. The Government is taking forward, however, the recommendation in the Patten Report that a substantial fund should be set up to help injured police officers, injured retired officers and their families, as well as police widows' (Recommendation 87). Patten specifically mentions that the fund could be used to supplement the income of those on very low incomes.

Royal Ulster Constabulary: Widows' Pensions

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that paying Royal Ulster Constabulary widows a pension of less than £150 per month is in keeping with the spirit sought in the Belfast Agreement; and
	Whether they consider that having a two-tier system of pension provision for Royal Ulster Constabulary widows is in keeping with the Belfast Agreement's call for parity of esteem.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The pensions paid to some early RUC widows was commented upon in the report by the Independent Commission on Policing in Northern Ireland, set up under the provisions of the Belfast Agreement. The Commission's proposal to set up a fund to address, inter alia, their low pension position has been accepted by Her Majesty's Government and plans for it are being made at the moment.

Murders of Royal Ulster Constabulary Officers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people have been convicted of involvement in the 302 murders of Royal Ulster Constabulary officers since 1969; how many cases this figure represents; how many of those convicted are currently still imprisoned; and how many were released under the recent early release scheme.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The information requested on the number of persons convicted of involvement in the murders of the 302 RUC officers since 1969 and the number of cases this represents is not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Of those convicted, a total of six prisoners have been released under the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Act 1998 with a further seven prisoners due to be released on 28 July 2000.

Northern Ireland: Bail Offences

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many times bail conditions have been broken in Northern Ireland in each of the last ten years; and
	How many people have been charged with offences while on bail from a court in Northern Ireland during each of the last ten years.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The information requested is not avialable. Statistics on the breaching of bail conditions and on persons charged with offences while on bail are not routinely collected in Northern Ireland.

United Kingdom Bicentenary

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made with plans to mark the bicentenary in 2001 of the creation of the United Kingdom; and what is their response to proposals already submitted.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Government's position remains that there are no plans for official government-organised events, but that we will consider specific proposals to mark the anniversary and whether it would be appropriate to support these in any way. Bodies such as the British Council and the British-Irish Association have already been involved in marking the anniversary through support for conferences.

Northern Ireland: Training Schools

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many boys and girls were resident in each of the Training Schools in Northern Ireland at the most recent date.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Training Schools were renamed Juvenile Justice Centres with effect from 31 January 1999. The population in each of the centres at 26 July 2000 was as follows:
	
		
			 Juvenile Justice Centre Totals 
			 Lisnevin (male) 25 
			 St Patrick's (male) 3 
			 Rathgael (male) 1 
			 Rathgael (female) 5 
			  
			 Totals 34

Northern Ireland: Training Schools

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	With regard to Lisnevin Training School, Northern Ireland, how many of those detained were on remand and what has been, in practice, the average length of time spent on remand during the past three years; and, in cases where young people were being held by order of a court, what were the maximum and minimum periods of detention and training ordered during the last three years.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The number of boys on remand in Lisnevin Juvenile Justice Centre in each of the last three years was as follows:
	
		
			  No Average Time 
			 1997 199 38 days 
			 1998 231 26 days 
			 1999 202 23 days 
		
	
	The maximum and minimum periods of detention for those given Training School Orders or Juvenile Justice Centre Orders was as follows:
	
		
			  Minimum Maximum 
			 1997 2 years -- 
			 1998 2 years -- 
			 1999 6 months 24 months 
		
	
	n.b. The Training School Order was fixed at 2 years.

Northern Ireland: Training Schools

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many hours per week of education have been provided for those detained at Lisnevin Training School, Northern Ireland, in each of the last three years; whether education is provided throughout the year, or only during school terms; whether training is available in addition to education; and, if so, for how many hours per week.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: During each of the last three years, 25 hours per week of education has been provided at Lisnevin Juvenile Justice Centre. The academic year totals 190 days (the same number of days as education is provided in State schools) and is divided into four terms.
	Education is provided throughout the year, with a four-week break during the summer, and shorter breaks at Christmas, Easter and Halloween.
	Vocational training such as woodwork and horticulture is provided for a total of six hours--that is, three hours each week for each subject and is included in the 25 hours' educational provision.

Millennium Dome: Allocation of Sale Proceeds

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What sum will be allocated from the proceeds of the sale of the Millennium Dome site for the repayment of monies made available by the Millennium Commission above the original grant of £399 million; and what sum will be paid to English Partnerships.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No monies from the sale of the Millennium Dome will be allocated to the Millennium Commission. Any operating surplus from the New Millennium Experience Company (NMEC) will be returned to the Millennium Commission. I refer the noble Baroness to the answer I gave the noble Lord, Lord Tomlinson, on 27 July 2000.

Leaked Memoranda

Lord Tebbit: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the recent publication of memoranda between the Prime Minister, other Ministers, officials and political advisers has prejudiced national security; and what is the security classification of those memoranda.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The leak of any document written by the Prime Minister is a cause for concern. These particular papers did not carry a security classification and their publication did not prejudice national security.

Task Forces

Baroness Gale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish the six-monthly update of information on task forces, ad hoc advisory groups and reviews established since 2 May 1997.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I have placed in the Library of the House lists containing updated details about those live task forces, ad hoc advisory groups and reviews established between 2 May 1997 and 30 April 2000. The lists also contain details about those bodies that have been wound up since 1 November 1999.

Departmental Cars

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What criteria are taken into acount when purchasing cars for Government Departments by the Government Car and Despatch Agency.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Responsibility for these matters has been delegated under the terms of the Framework Document to the Government Car and Despatch Agency. I have asked its Chief Executive, Mr Nick Matheson, to write to the noble Lord.
	Letter to Lord Hoyle from the Chief Executive of the Government Car and Despatch Agency, Mr Nick Matheson
	Lord Falconer of Thoroton, Minister of State at the Cabinet Office, has asked me in my capacity as the Chief Executive responsible for the Government Car and Despatch Agency to reply to your parliamentary Question about the criteria for purchasing cars for the Government Car Service.
	In establishing whether a particular car is suitable for use by the Government Car Service I have to be satisfied that it is going to be safe, reliable and comfortable. Its running costs must not be excessive, the vehicle receives full technical support from the manufacturer and the car will have a reasonable residual value when it is ready for disposal. Trim levels must be comfortable without being extravagant to meet guidelines set by the Prime Minister. But I also pay particular attention to passenger accessibility, particularly as the car is often fully occupied. Ministers have to be able to work effectively whilst travelling, and be able to get in and out of the car easily.
	In addition to vehicles supplied by the Government Car Service for use by Ministers, government departments may purchase vehicles for their own purposes.

Departmental Cars

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What criteria are used when purchasing cars for use by:
	(a) the Foreign and Commonwealth Office;
	(b) the Department of Social Security;
	(c) the Department of Health;
	(d) the Department for Education and Employment;
	(e) the Lord Chancellor's Office;
	(f) the Northern Ireland Office;
	(g) the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions;
	(h) the Ministry of Defence;
	(i) the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food;
	(j) the Home Office;
	(k) the Department of Trade and Industry.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Vehicles are purchased in line with the Government's policy of securing value for money for the taxpayer. Value for money is the optimum combination of whole life costs and quality (or fitness for purpose) to meet the user's requirement. Criteria to be taken into account are essentially economic and will include quality, aesthetics, delivery, maintenance, management, operating and disposal costs as well as initial price.

NMEC: Annual Report and Financial Statement

Baroness Massey of Darwen: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will make available to the House the Annual Report and Financial Statements for the period ending 31 December 1999 of the New Millennium Experience Company.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Copies of the New Millennium Experience Company's Annual Report and Financial Statement for the period ended 31 December 1999 were placed in the Libraries of the House on 21 July 2000.

NMEC: Annual Report and Financial Statement

Lord Hoyle: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 29 June (WA 96) on the type and make of cars used by the Northern Ireland Office, what types, makes and number of cars are supplied to the Northern Ireland Office by the Government Car and Despatch Agency; and who has the use of these cars.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I refer the noble Lord to my Answer of 24 July 2000 (col. WA 16.)

Northern Ireland: Terrorist Beatings

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list the dates and locations of known punishment beatings undertaken by terrorist organisations in Northern Ireland between 1 January and 30 June 2000; and how this total compares with the same period in 1999.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The attached table shows the number of paramilitary-style shootings and assaults during the periods 1 January to 30 June 1999 and 2000. We do not keep separate figures on the locations but by far the largest number take place in the Greater Belfast area.
	
		Casualties as a Result of Paramilitary Style Attacks 1 January to 30 June 1999 and 2000
		
			  2000 (to 30 June) 1999 (to 30 June) 
			  Shootings Assaults Shootings Assaults 
			  Loy Rep Loy Rep Loy Rep Loy Rep 
			 January 3 -- 9 1 6 5 17 12 
			 February 4 -- 4 3 6 1 13 5 
			 March 11 6 8 4 -- 4 11 2 
			 April 6 9 3 7 2 2 3 4 
			 May 9 5 6 8 4 4 7 1 
			 June 6 3 6 4 5 5 8 6 
			  
			 Total 39 23 36 27 23 21 59 30

Peers' Free Postage

Lord Marlesford: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	Whether the House of Lords is entitled to decide whether or not peers should be allowed to use franked envelopes, similar to those provided for members of the House of Commons, for correspondence on parliamentary business.

Lord Boston of Faversham: No. Expenditure by Members of the House incurred on parliamentary business may be recovered within limits set by resolutions of the House. Responsibility for tabling these resolutions lies with the Government and they are moved by the Leader of the House. Changes to the Peers' Reimbursement Allowance Scheme proposed by the Government have usually followed recommendations made by the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB).
	The cost of postage arising from correspondence in connection with parliamentary business is one of the items which Lords may claim under the Secretarial Allowance. The SSRB have, in the past, taken into account the cost of postage when recommending the maximum sum which may be claimed for this allowance.

Peers' Free Postage

Lord Marlesford: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What arrangements exist for free postage for Peers communicating with (a) other members of the House of Lords, (b) members of the House of Commons, (c) Ministers, (d) Government Departments and (e) other public bodies.

Lord Boston of Faversham: (a) and (b) Members may use the free internal mail system for sending any mail within the Parliamentary estate, including to Lords and Members of Parliament. If the Lord or Member of Parliament has given instructions for mail to be forwarded to a different address, the appropriate House will bear the cost.
	(c), (d) and (e) The Mail Room off Peers' lobby will accept unstamped mail for any official buildings within the M.25 which are covered by the InterDespatch Service (IDS). A list of IDS Call Points is held by the Mail Room and the Staff Superintendent (extension 3213), and includes government departments and several other public bodies. The envelope should be clearly marked "IDS".
	Peers may also use special post-paid air mail envelopes, available from the Printed Paper Office, for certain official EU addresses.

Peers' Free Postage

Lord Marlesford: asked the Chariman of Committees:
	What arrangements exist for free postage to enable members of the House of Lords to send copies of Hansard to members of the public.

Lord Boston of Faversham: Lords who wish occasionally to send their copy of Hansard to a third party may ask the Printed Paper Office to frank the envelope provided it has already been addressed and sealed.

House of Lords Staff: Ethnic Minority and Gender Breakdown

Baroness Whitaker: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What is the ethnic minority and gender breakdown of the staff of the House of Lords at all grades.

Lord Boston of Faversham: Ethnic and gender breakdown for the House of Lords' staff is as set out in the table:
	
		Staff of the House of Lords as at 1 April 2000
		
			 Band Total No. White Ethnic Minority Male Female 
			 Senior Structure 20 20 - 18 (90%) 2 (10%) 
			 Band A (Officers) 31 31 - 19 (61.3%) 12 (38.7% 
			 Band B (Higher Executive Officer/Senior  Executive Officer etc.) 50 50 - 23 (46%) 27 (54%) 
			 Band C (Executive Officer/Personal Secs./  Doorkeepers) 103 96 (93.2%) 7 (6.8%) 43 (41.7%) 60 (58.3%) 
			 Band D (Clerical/Attendant/Chef) 45 40 (88.9%) 5 (11.1%) 32 (71.1%) 13 (28.9%) 
			 Band E (Catering Staff, Housekeepers etc.) 100 71 (71%) 29(29%) 28 (28%) 72 (72%) 
			  
			 Total: 349 308 (88.3%) 41 (11.7%) 163 (46.7%) 186 (53.3%)

Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Outbreak, USA

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will ask the United States Department of Agriculture for samples for research purposes from sheep recently affected by Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy in Vermont.

Baroness Hayman: Samples from the sheep in the recent TSE outbreak in Vermont are being fully analysed in the USA. Samples for research purposes have not been requested by Her Majesty's Government. A UK scientist will be part of a Commission mission which intends to visit the USA in August to examine the scientific analysis of these sheep.

MAFF Service Delivery Targets

Lord Desai: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food have made in meeting the service delivery targets set out in Commitment to Service.

Baroness Hayman: The table below sets out the performance achieved by the Regional Service Centres (RSCs) during 1999-2000 against the targets published in the Charter document Commitment to Service.
	
		RSC Performance data (per cent) for financial year 1999-2000 (unless otherwise specified)
		
			   Total 
			 Arable Area Payments  Scheme Oilseeds 
			  Main payments Non-Food payments Advanced payments Final payments 99 97 99 99 
			 Beef Special Premium  Scheme Advance payments (1999) Balance payments (1998) CID applications issued (1999) Premium paid CIDs issued (1999) 97 99 99  99 
			 Suckler Cow Premium  Scheme Balance payments 1998 Advance payments 1999 99 99 
			 Hill Livestock  Compensatory  Allowances Claims 1999 99 
			 Sheep Annual Premium 
			 Scheme Claims marketing year 1999 99 
			 Environmentally 
			 Sensitive Areas Applications Claims 90 98 
			 Environmentally  Sensitive Areas 
			 Conservation Plan Applications Claims 77 93 
			 Farm and Conservation  Grant Scheme 1991 Plan Claims 78 
			 Farm Woodland  Premium Scheme Applications Claims (1999) 90 81 
			 Injurious Weeds Complaints receiving a response within 15 working days 95 
			 New Nitrate Sensitive 
			 Areas Scheme Claims (1999) 98 
			 Protection of Badgers  Act 1992 Licence applications 97 
			 Strychnine Permits Applications 99 
			 Agricultural Wage  Inspections Visits made within 10 working days of the RSC receiving the complaint 67 
			 Wildlife & Countryside  Act Licence applications 98 
			 Correspondence Answered within 10 
			 working days 92 
			 Complaints Numbers receiving response within 10 working days 80 
		
	
	Footnotes:
	(i) FWPS claims--Under certain circumstances, FWPS agreement holders may count some or all of their FWPS land towards their AAPS set aside requirements. The AAPS set aside payment rate (to which the FWPS payment is "linked" in these cases) fell below the FWPS rate for the first time in 1999, and the associated payments had to be restricted. Problems/delays were encountered both by the Information Technology Division in amending the payment system, and also by the RSCs in identifying the agreements/land involved. Regettably, this resulted in a significant number of Charter failures.
	(ii) FWPS applications--The FWPS is one of a number of measures which were notified under the new EC Rural Development Regulation (RDR), which took effect on 1 January 2000. The majority of "failures" reported relate to applications submitted on or after that date, which cannot be approved until the England Rural Development Plan (ERDP) has received Commission approval.
	(iii) The high failure rate for Agricultural Wages Inspections arose primarily because of difficulties at one RSC where most of the complaints were sent for investigation during a short period when the wages inspectors' time was already fully taken up carrying out IACS Arable Area Payments Scheme inspections needing urgent completion to protect the Department from EC disallowance.
	(iv) The relatively high failure rates for the ESA Scheme were due primarily to the introduction of new and complex EC Regulations, uneven workloads and staffing difficulties.
	(v) The number of claims processed for the Farm and Capital Grant Scheme 1991 is insignificant compared to most other schemes. Staffing problems at the two RSCs with the largest number of claims has distorted an otherwise excellent success rate.
	(vi) The 80 per cent response rate to complaints is explained by the fact that often cases require referral to HQ or the National Scheme Management Centres and thus take longer than 10 days to resolve. In all cases where the deadline was not met, a holding letter was issued to the complainant detailing the reason for delay.
	General Notes:
	(i) The total percentage has been calculated by setting the entire number of applications or claims cleared within the target time against the total number received. Applications and claims not cleared due to reasons beyond our control (incorrect information supplied by applicant, etc.) are not included as failures to meet target.
	(ii) The Farm Conservation Grant Schemes 1989 Claims and Pilot NSA Claims have been omitted from the table since these schemes are now closed.
	(iii) 44 complaints were referred to the MAFF Adjudicator during the year. 10 of these were upheld and 4 were partly upheld, 27 were not upheld. 3 cases were dealt with outside of the Citizen's Charter Unit.

Engineers' and Architects' Copyright

Lord Howie of Troon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What specific means an engineer or an architect has to assert his or her right to be recognised as the author of an artefact under the terms of Part II of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Under the terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, copyright is granted to the authors of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, including works of architecture and artistic craftsmanship. These authors are also granted the moral right to be identified as the author of the work in certain circumstances, such as, for example, in the case of a building, on the building itself and where graphic representations or photographs of it are published. However, this right does not apply unless the author has asserted his or her wish to exercise it by giving notice to this effect (which generally has to be in writing and signed) to those seeking to use or exploit the work. Moreover, the right may be waived by the author, and is also subject to certain exceptions such that it does not apply, for example, to anything done by an author's employer in whom ownership of copyright originally vested. Where the right applies and has been infringed, the author may take court action to obtain an injunction against further infringement and/or damages. The relevant provisions of the 1988 Act are those set out in sections 77 to 79, 87 and 103.

Government Departments: Promptness of Payments

Lord Stone of Blackheath: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What proportion of bills were paid on time by government departments and their agencies during financial year 1999-2000.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: I am pleased to announce that there has been a further improvement in the payment performance of central government as a whole. The overall payment performance shows that 97.8 per cent of suppliers' bills were paid on time and departments are making good progress towards meeting the 100 per cent target set for this financial year.
	There is no room for complacency. It is particularly important that the public sector sets an example to business and is seen to pay its bills on time. I am disappointed to see that a number of departments and agencies failed to meet this year's target of 100 per cent. I have taken steps to remind all departments and agencies of the importance of paying suppliers' bills on time and meeting the target.
	I am particularly disappointed at my own department's failure to meet the target. It is unacceptable that the department which has overall responsibility for the Government's policy on prompt payment should itself fail to meet the target. My officials are introducing new measures designed to ensure that the DTI meets the target as soon as possible this year.
	The Government are committed to improving the UK's payment culture. Late payment is a serious problem, particularly for small businesses. Not knowing when the customers' bills will be paid means uncertain cashflow, increased borrowings, higher costs and reduced profits.
	Government departments and their agencies are required to monitor their payment performance and to publish the results in their departmental or annual reports. The following table lists, by department, the proportion of bills paid within 30 days, or other agreed credit period, of receipt of a valid invoice for financial year 1999-2000.
	
		Government Departments Payment Performance 1999-2000
		
			 Main Departments Paid on Time (Percentage) 
			 National Weights & Measures Laboratory(1) 100.00 
			 National Investment and Loans Office 100.00 
			 Privy Council Office 100.00 
			  
			 Radiocommunications Agency(1) 99.98 
			 Registry of Friendly Societies 99.90 
			 Ministry of Defence 99.77 
			 Department for Culture, Media and Sport 99.59 
			 Land Registry 99.26 
			 Patent Office(1) 99.13 
			 Office of Water Services 99.07 
			 Public Records Office 99.06 
			 Ordnance Survey 98.90 
			 Government Actuary's Department 98.84 
			 Export Credit Guarantee Department 98.60 
			 Insolvency Service(1) 98.56 
			 HM Treasury 98.51 
			 Office for National Statistics 98.51 
			 Office of Fair Trading 98.49 
			 Office for Standards in Education 98.40 
			 Office of the Rail Regulator 98.20 
			 HM Customs & Excise 98.06 
			 Inland Revenue 97.98 
			 NI Dept. Health Estates 97.95 
			 Foreign & Commonwealth Office 97.90 
			 Intervention Board for Agricultural Produce 97.81 
			 Office of Telecommunications 97.68 
			 Health & Safety Executive 97.58 
			 Northern Ireland Office 97.56 
			 Crown Prosecution Service 97.50 
			 Lord Chancellor's Department 97.42 
			 Charity Commission 97.39 
			 Department for Education & Employment 97.31 
			 Forestry Commission 97.30 
			 NI Dept of Education 97.28 
			 Government Communications HQ 97.14 
			 PFO (GCHQ) 97.14 
			 Department for National Savings 97.10 
			 Department for International Development 96.82 
			 Office of the Parliamentry Commissioner for  Administration and Health Service  Commissioners 96.48 
			 Home Office 96.34 
			 NI Court Service 96.32 
			 Cabinet Office (OPS) 96.24 
			 Department of Health 95.28 
			 Department of Social Security 95.14 
			 Shadow Strategic Rail Authority 94.78 
			 Department of the Environment, Transport  and the Regions 94.70 
			 Serious Fraud Office 94.49 
			 Royal Parks Agency(2) 94.00 
			 NI Dept. Environment inc. agencies 93.05 
			 Treasury Solicitors Department 93.05 
			 Department of Trade and Industry 93.00 
			 Employment Tribunal Service(1) 93.00 
			 NI Dept of Agriculture & Rural Development 92.83 
			 Companies House(1) 92.34 
			 Royal Mint 91.00 
			 NI Department of Finance and Personnel 90.22 
			 Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries & Food 89.51 
			  
			 Overall Total 97.89 
		
	
	Notes:
	(1) Are Agencies of the Department of Trade and Industry
	(2) Is an Agency in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport